The trial Court failed to consider the fact that since the plaintiff came forward with the suit for specific performance, the duty is upon him to discharge his onus first as per Order XVIII Rule 1 of CPC. The trial Court failed to appreciate the fact that the defendant never admitted the execution of the document as pleaded by the plaintiff. The defendant in paragraph no.5 of the written statement, has stated that the defendant's husband S.Balakrishnan appears to have certain financial transactions with the plaintiff and at that time, the defendant obtained some undated unfilled blank sheets and stamp papers duly signed by his wife and with the help of those papers, the agreement must have been created. In the plaint, it is stated that the plaintiff is having all the documents with him and since all the documents are alleged to have been in the custody of the plaintiff, it is the duty of the plaintiff to let in evidence. The defendant by way of counter claim has sought for a mandatory injunction, directing the plaintiff to submit the statement of accounts with regard to the transaction between the plaintiff and the defendant's husband and for mandatory injunction for the delivery of the undated, unfilled blank non-judicial stamp papers and the signed plain sheets. When the defendant put her signature on a blank paper, the burden is upon the plaintiff to prove the contents of the document.
